Should we sign Murray permanently?

Do you want Glenn Murray to sign permanently?

Yes, I believe he's performed well enough to sign.
73
63%
No, there's better players available to sign.
25
22%
I'm not fussed either way.
18
16%
 
Total votes: 116
User avatar
Ian Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 35156
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 13:43
Location: Playing spot the pc*nt on HNA?

Re: Should we sign Murray permanently?

by Ian Royal » 30 Dec 2014 11:59

From Despair To Where? But, as i pointed out before, that was based on where we were in August. Since then, revenue has been down by in the region of the sum of 2,000 ticket and consession sales per game, a conservative estimate of £50,000 per game. If we are really sailing as close to the wind as we are being told we are, that's between £500,000 and £1m. for the season. Add to that the cost of sacking Adkins and suddenly there's a Glenn Murray sized hole in the budget

If we can't afford him, i don't want him.

The club have already said they won't risk FFP, so your concerns are redundent. If we move to sign him it's because it won't harm FFP. No one is saying they want us to breach FFP to get him.

Speculating on where the FFP line is, is pointless. Seeing as your only objection is redundent, welcome to the pro Murray camp.

User avatar
Silver Fox
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 25891
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 10:02
Location: From the Andes to the indies in my undies

Re: Should we sign Murray permanently?

by Silver Fox » 30 Dec 2014 12:42

Dave-Royal murray was talking to radio berkshire this morning and he what to stay with reading !!! he said it up to reading to get him permanent... signed... he don't what to stay at palace !!... fans on here don't no what they talking about !!!


I certainly don't no what you talking about!!!!1!!1!!!

User avatar
From Despair To Where?
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 23605
Joined: 19 Apr 2004 08:37
Location: See me in m'pants and ting

Re: Should we sign Murray permanently?

by From Despair To Where? » 30 Dec 2014 12:51

I'm not pro or anti Murray. As a short term fix, he's fine but if we can't afford him then being pro or anti Murray is redundant. I cergainly don't think FFP is irrelevant if signing Murray prevents us from strengthening elsewhere., especially considering that 3 of our 5 signings in the summer were forwards (and a 4th is permenantly injured) and yet it is still seen as an area of the team that is weak.

User avatar
floyd__streete
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 8326
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 18:03
Location: ARREST RAY ILSLEY.

Re: Should we sign Murray permanently?

by floyd__streete » 30 Dec 2014 12:57

Absolutely we should.

Doubt that we will.

User avatar
SPARTA
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 4742
Joined: 23 Sep 2012 17:40
Location: If you give us 90 minutes, we'll give you a lifetime

Re: Should we sign Murray permanently?

by SPARTA » 30 Dec 2014 13:42

Dave-Royal affair we can afford murray in my opinion


Is this you coming out?


Martin41
Member
Posts: 329
Joined: 20 Feb 2014 14:22

Re: Should we sign Murray permanently?

by Martin41 » 30 Dec 2014 13:45

Dave-Royal affair we can afford murray in my opinion

Even by your standards that makes no sense!!! What??

sandman
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 12449
Joined: 01 Oct 2008 18:25
Location: Slaughterhouse soaked in blood and betrayal

Re: Should we sign Murray permanently?

by sandman » 30 Dec 2014 14:54

Dave-Royal Martin 41 read my post careful you can't read you scum bag


R u a methud acter David?

User avatar
Ian Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 35156
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 13:43
Location: Playing spot the pc*nt on HNA?

Re: Should we sign Murray permanently?

by Ian Royal » 30 Dec 2014 16:01

From Despair To Where? I'm not pro or anti Murray. As a short term fix, he's fine but if we can't afford him then being pro or anti Murray is redundant. I cergainly don't think FFP is irrelevant if signing Murray prevents us from strengthening elsewhere., especially considering that 3 of our 5 signings in the summer were forwards (and a 4th is permenantly injured) and yet it is still seen as an area of the team that is weak.

Ignoring the fact that if we lose him striker is then jumped to the main position we need to strengthen

Martin41
Member
Posts: 329
Joined: 20 Feb 2014 14:22

Re: Should we sign Murray permanently?

by Martin41 » 30 Dec 2014 17:56

Dave-Royal Martin 41 read my post careful you can't read you :x


If you re read your last post I think you will see it makes no sense.......


User avatar
paultheroyal
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 12829
Joined: 04 Mar 2005 12:59
Location: Hob Nob Reality TV Champ 2010/2011

Re: Should we sign Murray permanently?

by paultheroyal » 30 Dec 2014 18:33

Not a cat in hells chance that pardew will release him now to us. Big loss.

User avatar
floyd__streete
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 8326
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 18:03
Location: ARREST RAY ILSLEY.

Re: Should we sign Murray permanently?

by floyd__streete » 30 Dec 2014 18:41

^ isn't the deal more along the lines that the move is to be made permanent on the player's say-so with a fee already agreed? Must admit, that does sound a curious agreement if indeed it is the case.

I expect the player will want to go back and force his way into a struggling side. Good luck to him in the future. Reading NEED to strengthen if this is the case. Cox, Blackman and a disinterested Pog is entirely inadequate for this division and failure to add a further striking option would be disgracefully negligent on the club's behalf.

Haag Royal
Member
Posts: 412
Joined: 19 Oct 2011 19:17

Re: Should we sign Murray permanently?

by Haag Royal » 30 Dec 2014 18:46

Agreed. Pards would be daft to let him come here before he's seen him play for CPFC. You can't blame him for that with Doyle going back to whereever crocked and Palace where they are..

Time for Stevie boy to use his CFC and LFC contacts and get a loan or two in to replace him as he will certainly be missed.

User avatar
Ian Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 35156
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 13:43
Location: Playing spot the pc*nt on HNA?

Re: Should we sign Murray permanently?

by Ian Royal » 30 Dec 2014 19:09

If there's a fee agreed as part of the loan - which has been indicated many times - what allows Palace to scupper the deal apart from offering Murray first team football at a higher level without a pay cut - ie persuade Murray to stay, not cancel the agreement.


paddy20
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1251
Joined: 18 Apr 2007 17:50
Location: Wokingham

Re: Should we sign Murray permanently?

by paddy20 » 30 Dec 2014 19:36

More to the point can we afford not to? Who on earth is going to score the goals now? Not Kanu!!!

SCIAG
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 6406
Joined: 17 Jun 2008 17:43
Location: Liburd for England

Re: Should we sign Murray permanently?

by SCIAG » 30 Dec 2014 19:54

I'd be very content if we did sign him, but I'd rather we went for someone younger and cheaper, even if they weren't quite as good.

Eoin Doyle is a very attractive option but I think he's attracting PL interest.

None of our young strikers look the part quite yet (not counting Tanner, Kelly or Stacey as strikers before anyone chimes in), and I don't think many people have faith in Blackman or HRK stepping up (personally I think they're both best as wide men in a 4-3-3 rather than central strikers). We need a striker.

I'm not really answering the question. I think he's good enough, but it depends on whether we can find someone else who is similarly suitable.

User avatar
SPARTA
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 4742
Joined: 23 Sep 2012 17:40
Location: If you give us 90 minutes, we'll give you a lifetime

Re: Should we sign Murray permanently?

by SPARTA » 30 Dec 2014 20:11

sandman
Dave-Royal Martin 41 read my post careful you can't read you scum bag


R u a methud acter David?


A meth addict, maybe.

Tommio
Member
Posts: 648
Joined: 04 Aug 2013 14:13

Re: Should we sign Murray permanently?

by Tommio » 30 Dec 2014 20:48

SCIAG I'd be very content if we did sign him, but I'd rather we went for someone younger and cheaper, even if they weren't quite as good.

Eoin Doyle is a very attractive option but I think he's attracting PL interest.

None of our young strikers look the part quite yet (not counting Tanner, Kelly or Stacey as strikers before anyone chimes in), and I don't think many people have faith in Blackman or HRK stepping up (personally I think they're both best as wide men in a 4-3-3 rather than central strikers). We need a striker.

I'm not really answering the question. I think he's good enough, but it depends on whether we can find someone else who is similarly suitable.

We've been linked with Eoin Doyle today http://spireitegazette.blogspot.co.uk/

Forbury Lion
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 8815
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 08:37
Location: https://youtu.be/c4sX57ZUhzc

Re: Should we sign Murray permanently?

by Forbury Lion » 02 Jan 2015 13:33

Dave-Royal murray was talking to radio berkshire this morning and he what to stay with reading !!! he said it up to reading to get him permanent... signed... he don't what to stay at palace !!... fans on here don't no what they talking about !!!
I assume he was talking on a local Reading area radio station.

If the new Palace manager says he's a first team contender in the prem then I imagine he'll be singing a different song.

URZZZZZ
Member
Posts: 590
Joined: 11 May 2013 10:33

Re: Should we sign Murray permanently?

by URZZZZZ » 02 Jan 2015 16:05

Reading FC will make a decision next week whether to press ahead with buying Glenn Murray from Crystal Palace.

Royals’ Thai owners plan to discuss their next move at a board meeting now that Murray's loan spell from Palace has expired.

Manager Steve Clarke desperately wants to keep hold of the 31-year-old striker, who is the club's joint-top scorer after netting eight goals in 18 appearances.

However, Clarke will not know until next week’s meeting whether Royals can afford Murray’s potential £3million fee or negotiate a lower price as they battle to stay within Financial Fair Play guidelines.

Alan Pardew has been promised a £15m transfer kitty, once he is confirmed as Palace's new boss, which could open the door to Murray’s switch to the Royals.



Is he really worth 3 mil???????!

User avatar
GH Royal
Member
Posts: 341
Joined: 05 Sep 2014 09:46
Location: Bracknell / Y25

Re: Should we sign Murray permanently?

by GH Royal » 02 Jan 2015 16:09

URZZZZZ Reading FC will make a decision next week whether to press ahead with buying Glenn Murray from Crystal Palace.

Royals’ Thai owners plan to discuss their next move at a board meeting now that Murray's loan spell from Palace has expired.

Manager Steve Clarke desperately wants to keep hold of the 31-year-old striker, who is the club's joint-top scorer after netting eight goals in 18 appearances.

However, Clarke will not know until next week’s meeting whether Royals can afford Murray’s potential £3million fee or negotiate a lower price as they battle to stay within Financial Fair Play guidelines.

Alan Pardew has been promised a £15m transfer kitty, once he is confirmed as Palace's new boss, which could open the door to Murray’s switch to the Royals.



Is he really worth 3 mil???????!

Absolutely not. £1.5 mil maximum.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 245 guests

It is currently 15 Jun 2024 19:53